The present invention relates to methods and apparatus for processing the sale of products and, more particularly, to methods and apparatus for processing the sale of products to buyers who have submitted offers to purchase the products.
Most systems for processing the sale of products are seller-driven. In such systems, the seller, not the buyer, sets product prices and configures products. In addition, the seller must attempt to attract buyers and complete the sales of products. Accordingly, the seller bears costs such as product advertising. Stores, catalogs, classified advertisements, telemarketing, auction houses and on-line computerized reservation systems are all seller-driven systems.
In typical seller-driven systems, a seller sets a product price and a buyer decides whether or not to accept that price. Prices for some products, such as airline tickets, can change frequently, but even in such systems the buyer must still wait for the seller to offer a price that is acceptable to the buyer.
Auctions are seller-driven, even though prices are not directly set by the seller. In an auction, the seller attracts a number of buyers who collectively bid for and thereby determine the product price. However, the seller may subsequently reject the group-determined price, if he desires.
Other systems, such as NASDAQ or the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), match buyers and sellers by offering an efficient, fair and orderly marketplace. Such systems typically favor neither buyers nor sellers, but simply facilitate communications that allow for the matching of offers and acceptances. An example of an automated exchange-driven commerce system for trading futures is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,903,201.
In contrast to the above systems, a buyer-driven system is one in which buyers find sellers, such as a xe2x80x9cwanted to buyxe2x80x9d classified advertisement. A help-wanted advertisement is another type of buyer-driven system in which an employer offers to buy a product consisting of the services of a qualified employee. The inquiry is typically advertised to a large number of potential xe2x80x9csellers,xe2x80x9d (people who may be qualified to accept the offer). Each of the potential sellers may respond by submitting a resume to the prospective employer.
Buyer-driven systems are in many ways preferable to other systems for processing the sale of products. For example, a buyer can exercise more control over the terms and conditions of the sale of a desired product. Additionally, when a large number of potential sellers exist, but those sellers do not or cannot advertise globally, buyers may still communicate their product preferences to the sellers. A buyer-driven system would also be advantageous for sellers by allowing sellers to sell a product at a reduced price set by and known only to the buyer, thus without destroying the seller""s advertised price structure. The buyer would realize the benefits of a reduced product price, while the seller would realize the benefit of selling some, but not all, products at reduced prices, when desirable.
Unfortunately, buyer-driven systems for processing the sale of products require a buyer to directly or indirectly communicate his product preferences to each of a number of potential sellers. Known systems typically make such communication too burdensome to be effective on a large scale. For example, an individual seeking car repair services generally would not want to contact every repair shop and communicate details of his repair needs to each. The benefits to the consumer from doing so (e.g., achieving a lower price) would likely be outweighed by the amount of time and money expended in the effort. Known systems also would not typically prevent buyers from receiving an inordinate number of offers from potential sellers, many of which may be unqualified.
Similarly, known buyer-driven commerce systems impose costs on sellers as well. Sellers must incur substantial costs merely to review and understand each offer, many of which may be from buyers who have little or no intention of buying. Accordingly, buyers that actually buy must pay additional costs to subsidize those that merely provide offers, but do not actually buy. Moreover, sellers may also be reluctant to customize products and/or prices for buyers.
There have been some attempts to use the Internet in a bilateral, buyer-driven system for processing the sale of products. However, those attempts have been largely unsuccessful. Currently, there exist xe2x80x9cbulletin boardxe2x80x9d sites on the Internet where buyers can electronically post offers at little or no cost. Unfortunately, potential sellers are deterred from using bulletin board sites because (i) there is no guarantee of the authenticity of the posted offers, (ii) the cost of negotiating with individual buyers is often too high, and (iii) it is difficult to enforce any agreement (including payment guarantees) which may be reached between the buyer and the seller.
Additionally, xe2x80x9cbulletin boardsxe2x80x9d containing posted offers are scattered across the Internet making it difficult, if not impossible, for sellers to find relevant offers. Finally, the posted offers may have any of a large number of possible formats, conditions and terms. In sum, sellers are reluctant to accept posted offers, and thus will not spend time and money to find and process offers. In turn, the absence of a sufficient number of sellers reduces the incentive for buyers to post offers.
In addition to the above-described drawbacks of known systems, sellers often require information relevant to the offer from a third party in order to determine whether to accept a buyer""s offer. For example, potential buyers of artworks require that the artworks be accompanied by a trusted third party""s xe2x80x9cseal of approvalxe2x80x9d. Such a seal would typically authenticate that the artworks are genuine, and also appraise their value. Similarly, potential lenders of funds require the credit history or xe2x80x9ccredit scorexe2x80x9d of a potential borrower. Lenders would typically not accept such critical information from the potential borrower, since the borrower might try to alter the information to appear more credit-worthy. The credit information must come from a trusted third party.
Accordingly, an offer to borrow funds, which would include borrower-specified conditions such as an interest rate and loan amount, would, by itself, be insufficient for the lender to determine whether to accept the offer. Potential lenders would not be able to ascertain whether the offer was acceptable in terms of credit risk and credit worthiness. Thus, buyers would not be able to usefully make such offers.
Systems for evaluating borrower credit exist. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,611,052 to Dykstra describes a system that accesses credit bureau information to obtain a credit score of a borrower. However, the system of the Dykstra patent does not allow a buyer to specify desired loan conditions. In addition, that system does nothing to prevent people who do not intend to buy from inundating a seller with worthless loan applications.
Thus, there exists a need for a buyer-driven system for processing the sale of products which overcomes the above-described drawbacks of prior art systems. In particular, there exists a need for a buyer-driven system which allows sellers to evaluate the acceptability of an offer from a buyer in light of information relevant to the offer from a third party.
There further exists a need for such a system that would facilitate a large-scale buyer-driven system for processing the sale of products overcoming the shortfalls of known systems.
It is an object of the present invention to allow sellers to evaluate the acceptability of an offer from a buyer in light of information relevant to the offer from a third party.
Generally, according to one aspect of the present invention, a central controller receives an offer signal including at least one condition signal. The offer signal defines a conditional purchase offer having at least one condition from a customer. The central controller also receives a payment identifier signal for specifying an account from which funds may be paid. An informational signal relevant to the offer is received from a third party. The informational signal typically includes relevant information that would not be trusted if it came from the borrower submitting the conditional purchase offer.
In one embodiment, the central controller transmits the offer signal and the informational signal to at least one seller. In response, an acceptance signal is received from at least one of the sellers. The central controller selects one acceptance signal, if more than one is received, and the corresponding lender is identified. The borrower is thereby bound to the identified lender under the terms and conditions of the offer.
In another embodiment, the central controller stores at least one rule signal from each seller. Each rule signal includes at least one seller-defined restriction that an offer must meet to be accepted. The central controller compares the offer signal and the informational signal with at least one of the rule signals, and in turn determines whether the offer signal and the informational signal satisfy each seller-defined restriction of any rule. If any rules are satisfied, one rule is selected, and the corresponding lender is identified. The borrower is thereby bound to the identified lender under the terms and conditions of the offer.
In either embodiment described above, use of the payment identifier signal is initiated if it is determined that the borrower has failed to abide by terms of the offer. Thus, there is incentive for borrowers to submit only genuine offers, and if any borrower reneges, the lender is assured to receive compensation.